by D.S, Gill
Acting ‘Jathedar’ ‘Prof Manjit Singh through his family lawyer and his two. men has threatened to prosecute Sikh Vichar Manch leader Gurbhajan Singh Gill for writing allegedly derogatory and blasphemous articles against Akal Takht and its jathedar in a Sikh monthly magazine ‘Sant Sipahi,”
It is unfortunate that after the invasion of the Golden Temple and the demolition of the Holy Takht by the army in 1984 Akal Takht Jathedars remained a silent spectator, though the law profile Sikhs did hold some Sarbat Khalsas at the Takht. SGPC appointed ‘jathedars’ did not deliver the goods and miserably failed to respect the aspirations of the Sikh people.
Prof Manjit Singh is a typical case at hand. He became controversial after he ran away from the Amritsar Declaration, which was made at the Takht under his patronage, and failed to take action against certain leaders who had assaulted the Takht and violated its edicts.
The omissions and commissions of the professor has lowered the status and prestige of the Almighty Throne in the eyes of the Sikhs nation and the world at large.
Surprisingly, the present incumbent has become intolerant of any criticism and has started thinking that he owes no, responsibility to the Sikh nation but to the “boss,” by whom he has been appointed to act on behalf of Bhai Ranjit Singh, whom he rarely consults.
The professor has threatened Sikh Vichar Manch President Gurbhajan Singh Gill, who is also an Administration Secretary of the International Human Rights Organization (THRO), to initiate criminal proceedings against him in court of law for allegedly writing against the “jathedar” and Akal Takht two articles in Sant Sipahi monthly magazine.
The legal notice has been issued by Jathedar’s family lawyer Bachittar Singh Giani, Chandigarh, who is also representing his brother Dr. Onkar Singh in High Court. I was asked to reply to the notice dated Sept. 30 , 1995 on behalf of Sardar Gurbhajan Singh Gill, not as in the capacity of chairman of the IHRO but as a lawyer. I, therefore, under the instructions of my client, sent on October 13 paragraph wise replies to the legal notice.
As said earlier, Sri Akal Takht Sahib is supreme and sacrosanct. The caretaker is not synonymous with the throne if he does not carry out the spirit of the institution, implements Gurmatas, edicts and declarations made under the aegis of Akal Takht and violates its maryada for personal gains or for any other extraneous reasons, like in the case of Aroor Singh. Now the question remains how will the ‘professor’ and his associates react to the reply? Will he appear in court to defend his acts or omissions, in case they opt for litigation? Will he be able to rebut the “allegations” assertions made in the articles? Are law courts being chosen as appropriate forum for all Units? The wise men say that the only viable course for the proposed litigants should be to advise the jathedar to resign in the better interest of the Panth because he will not be able to defend himself at any forum nor is it a maryada of Akal Takhi.
I, being a Sikh too, would request the appointing authority, Gurcharan Singh Tohra to relive the present incumbent for he had done what he wanted to do.
Article extracted from this publication >> November 3, 1995
